You are here

Bearsted Medical Practice Good

Reports


Review carried out on 18 January 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Bearsted Medical Practice on 18 January 2020. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

Inspection carried out on 28 February 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Bearsted Medical Practice on 5 March 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we followed up on breaches of regulations identified at a previous inspection on 7 July 2018.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice had improved the way in which it provided care, that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Improvements had been made to ensure there were comprehensive systems to keep people safe, which took account of current best practice. The whole team was engaged in reviewing and improving safety and safeguarding systems.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • Systems and processes to ensure good governance had been improved to ensure they were implemented effectively.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Bennyworth BS BMedSci MRCGP


Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 12 July 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as requires improvement overall. (Previous rating March 2015 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires improvement

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Requires improvement

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Bearsted Medical Practice on 12 July 2018, under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice’s system for reporting and recording significant events was not always effectively managed and implemented.
  • The practice did not always have clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. For example, infection prevention and control and fire safety procedures.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • Governance arrangements were not always sufficient or effectively implemented.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • Ensure that care and treatment is provided in a safe way for service users.
  • Ensure that systems and processes to ensure good governance are implemented effectively.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Continue to monitor and embed the procedure for two week wait referrals.
  • Continue to monitor and improve the way in which national patient safety alerts are managed.
  • Continue to monitor and embed the procedure for checks of repeat prescription collection.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 24 and 25 March 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Bearsted Medical Practice on 24 and 25 March 2015. The inspection was carried out over two days as there was insufficient time to establish enough information in one day which is why we returned on a second day. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services. It was also good for providing services for the patient population groups of; older people, people with long-term conditions, families, children and young people, working age people (including those recently retired and students), people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patient’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

However, there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider should;

  • Ensure maintenance of the vaccines cold chain is adequately monitored and recorded.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 20 May 2014

During Reference: R6 not found

Inspection carried out on 20 May 2014

During a routine inspection

The Bearsted Medical Practice provides primary medical care during week-day surgery hours for patients in the Bearsted area of Maidstone in Kent. The practice has eight general practitioners (GPs), who form the registered partnership. The services are commissioned by the West Kent Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).

We spoke with patients during our inspection, and they were all very complimentary about the services they received from the practice. We received many positive comments from the patients who had completed comment cards prior to our inspection. They all expressed a high level of satisfaction with the practice and staff. We spoke with the Patient Participation Group (PPG) representative, who emphasised the support, engagement and effective working relationship the group had with the practice management team. Staff we spoke with told us the management team were very open and approachable and that there was good team working amongst all the staff at the practice.

Although the practice provided safe care, we suggested that some changes could be made in relation to how medicines were managed. We also suggested some changes could be made in the practice about the procedures used to monitor and manage infection control. In addition, we had concerns about insufficient documented information in relation to pre-employment checks for some of the staff. We found that whilst the staff at the practice had received training in safeguarding children, the records showed that only one member of staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults. However, the staff we spoke with were able to demonstrate their knowledge of how to recognise suspected abuse and who to report any concerns to.

We found that the practice was well-led and provided caring, effective, and responsive services to a wide range of patient groups, including those of working age and recently retired, mothers with babies and younger children, older people, patients with long-term conditions and complex needs, people in vulnerable circumstances and those people experiencing poor mental health. We considered that the concerns we had regarding safety at the practice, had an impact across all patient groups.